Here is the first image of Ceres which shows detail on its surface. Already, the surface shows details not found in even the Hubble or the Keck images of Ceres. Already, Ceres is proving a fascinating world; it may be the only asteroid with an atmosphere. I wonder if Ceres will turn out to be a mini-Pluto and whether Pluto and Ceres will resemble each other.

The surface is probably a mixture of water ice and various hydrated minerals such as carbonates and clay. In January 2014, emissions of water vapor were detected from several regions of Ceres. This was somewhat unexpected, as large bodies in the asteroid belt do not typically emit vapor, a hallmark of comets.

The establishment tends to report in PRs that everything beyond Mars is made of water ice upon any slight detection of hydrogen and oxygen present. They think this way because, for them, H20 must have "seeded the Earth" instead of having the H20 on the Earth actually be from here. Nothing on Earth, for them, is from the Earth. It all came here as "impact events" as the "primordial building blocks."

Earth itself is not Earth, in other words. Earth is result of "impact events" that "created the oceans and all life." The life and water that is on Earth did not come from Earth. It all came from Dione, Europa, Enceladus.... anything but the actual Earth body. This is how the establishment thinks. They will insist that life and H20 came from anywhere but here. Despite the massive and unprecedented biodiversity of Earth, they will look to lifeless worlds for life--but not the Earth--as basis for life. This is how modern cosmology thinks.

viscount aero wrote:The establishment tends to report in PRs that everything beyond Mars is made of water ice upon any slight detection of hydrogen and oxygen present. They think this way because, for them, H20 must have "seeded the Earth" instead of having the H20 on the Earth actually be from here. Nothing on Earth, for them, is from the Earth. It all came here as "impact events" as the "primordial building blocks."

Earth itself is not Earth, in other words. Earth is result of "impact events" that "created the oceans and all life." The life and water that is on Earth did not come from Earth. It all came from Dione, Europa, Enceladus.... anything but the actual Earth body. This is how the establishment thinks. They will insist that life and H20 came from anywhere but here. Despite the massive and unprecedented biodiversity of Earth, they will look to lifeless worlds for life--but not the Earth--as basis for life. This is how modern cosmology thinks.

If Ceres ends up looking like Pluto (which we'll find out in July if everything works right on New Horizons), maybe the both will resemble this notional image that I made last fall while thinking about what that might be. Good ol' Photoshop! Note that I don't think it will be icy and white. I always have a 50-50 chance of being right.

Prediction: the flickering white spot will mysteriously saturate the camera's pixels. The "water" plumes are probably just hydroxyl ions. So Ceres is behaving like an electric comet. Mainstream scientists will be completely baffled. I am looking forward to this encounter!

NASA's Dawn spacecraft continues its approach to the dwarf planet Ceres for its planned mission. During this approach it has already snapped several images of this small planet located in the asteroid belt. And what these pictures have revealed has mystified scientists at NASA for weeks.

Like Us on Facebook

A strange, flickering white blotch has been found on the dwarf planet Ceres, puzzling scientists.

"Yes, we can confirm that it is something on Ceres that reflects more sunlight, but what that is remains a mystery," Mission Director and Chief Engineer for the Dawn mission, Marc Rayman says.

Currently, however, the Dawn spacecraft is too far away to provide any clearer images or study the strange phenomenon. The images reveal areas of light and dark on the face of the dwarf planet, indicating the presence of craters on the surface. But, at least for the moment, no specific features can be determined including the white spot as seen in the photographs.

"We do not know what the white spot is, but it's certainly intriguing," Rayman says. "In fact, it makes you want to send a spacecraft there to find out, and of course that is exactly what we are doing! So as Dawn brings Ceres into sharper focus, we will be able to see with exquisite detail what [the white spot] is."

viscount aero wrote:Earth itself is not Earth, in other words. Earth is result of "impact events" that "created the oceans and all life." The life and water that is on Earth did not come from Earth. It all came from Dione, Europa, Enceladus.... anything but the actual Earth body. This is how the establishment thinks. They will insist that life and H20 came from anywhere but here. Despite the massive and unprecedented biodiversity of Earth, they will look to lifeless worlds for life--but not the Earth--as basis for life. This is how modern cosmology thinks.

I think its not just how cosmology thinks but a way of thinking that permeates western society. Have you read Alan Watts? When we build houses on a hill, we don't adhere to the restrictions of the hill, we chop and flatten it so that we can build as though on a flat lifeless surface. Everything we touch we want to impose some perfect lifeless ideology to simplify nature. Its as though we have a bad case of 'not invented here' syndrome and nature must be subjegated. I recommend Alan Watts if you are not already familiar with his work.

viscount aero wrote:Earth itself is not Earth, in other words. Earth is result of "impact events" that "created the oceans and all life." The life and water that is on Earth did not come from Earth. It all came from Dione, Europa, Enceladus.... anything but the actual Earth body. This is how the establishment thinks. They will insist that life and H20 came from anywhere but here. Despite the massive and unprecedented biodiversity of Earth, they will look to lifeless worlds for life--but not the Earth--as basis for life. This is how modern cosmology thinks.

I think its not just how cosmology thinks but a way of thinking that permeates western society. Have you read Alan Watts? When we build houses on a hill, we don't adhere to the restrictions of the hill, we chop and flatten it so that we can build as though on a flat lifeless surface. Everything we touch we want to impose some perfect lifeless ideology to simplify nature. Its as though we have a bad case of 'not invented here' syndrome and nature must be subjegated. I recommend Alan Watts if you are not already familiar with his work.

Thanks, willendure. Yes I agree with you. And yes I've read AW over 25 years ago, not new to me And there is more out there like him. What we have today are sophisticated probes and sciences designed with tunnel vision, bias, and a presumed set of truths that do not necessarily embody actual truth or reality. So, too, the data becomes construed to conform to predisposed ideas that are not the truth. The data, too, is also fragmentary because of the biases engineered into the data gathering apparatus. So only a tiny fraction of a picture is seen when the entire picture looms in plain sight. Yet this looming picture, the bigger truth, is overlooked and ignored.

viscount aero wrote:Earth itself is not Earth, in other words. Earth is result of "impact events" that "created the oceans and all life." The life and water that is on Earth did not come from Earth. It all came from Dione, Europa, Enceladus.... anything but the actual Earth body. This is how the establishment thinks. They will insist that life and H20 came from anywhere but here. Despite the massive and unprecedented biodiversity of Earth, they will look to lifeless worlds for life--but not the Earth--as basis for life. This is how modern cosmology thinks.

I think its not just how cosmology thinks but a way of thinking that permeates western society. Have you read Alan Watts? When we build houses on a hill, we don't adhere to the restrictions of the hill, we chop and flatten it so that we can build as though on a flat lifeless surface. Everything we touch we want to impose some perfect lifeless ideology to simplify nature. Its as though we have a bad case of 'not invented here' syndrome and nature must be subjegated. I recommend Alan Watts if you are not already familiar with his work.

Thanks, willendure. Yes I agree with you. And yes I've read AW over 25 years ago, not new to me And there is more out there like him. What we have today are sophisticated probes and sciences designed with tunnel vision, bias, and a presumed set of truths that do not necessarily embody actual truth or reality. So, too, the data becomes construed to conform to predisposed ideas that are not the truth. The data, too, is also fragmentary because of the biases engineered into the data gathering apparatus. So only a tiny fraction of a picture is seen when the entire picture looms in plain sight. Yet this looming picture, the bigger truth, is overlooked and ignored.

Well, science is hard I guess. You have to work hard on some small piece of the puzzle and gather evidence that you are right, and fit it with mathematical equations to make quantitative predictions - its not surprising then if we miss the bigger picture.

Ego too plays its role. Its kind of hard to admit you might be wrong after you've spent the research grant and worked so hard to write those papers.